Scoring:
Not significant;
Low Significance;
Moderate Significance;
Medium-high Significance;
High Significance;
Exceptional Significance
Evidence A: La AmazonÃa Peruana está conformada por bosques, diferentes tipos de reservas y ecosistemas. Tienen un papel preponderante en la pervivencia de los Pueblos IndÃgenas, de la humanidad y en la preservación de la biodiversidad (Madre Tierra)
Evidence B:The area of the project is all the Peruvian Amazon region, this is why the score is high. However, the project may be too broad in geographical scope.
Scoring:
>50 t/ha - Low;
50 - 100 t/ha - Moderate;
>100 t/ha - High
Evidence A: Tienen varios proyectos en marcha que apuntan a la mitigación del cambio climático, los mismos que deberán realizar ajustes y/ o negociaciones diversas a nivel local y nacional para lograr una plena implementación de los acuerdos sobre Cambio Climático.
Evidence B:Yes, all the Peruvian Amazon is important for climate mitigation. Again, the scope of this project may be too broad.
Scoring:
IPLC governance (rights and institutions) not evident;
Project areas are marginally under IPLC governance (spatially or politically);
Project areas are partially under IPLC systems of governance (spatially or politically);
Project areas are largely under IPLC governance, but IPLC rights and/or institutions face significant constraints;
Project areas are held and managed under IPLC governance systems, with some limitations;
Project areas are held and managed under strong and active IPLC governance systems
Evidence A: AIDASEP es una organizacion indigena coformada por varias organizaciones regionales, comunidades y asociados incluyendo mujeres. Si embargo para la implementación de los proyectos con donantes aún tienen que contar con la autorización de las autoridades nacionales y los hombres indÃgenas son quienes llegan al poder politico/económico
Evidence B:The project aims to cover all areas where indigenous people live. Some of those territories are not fully under their control, they may be under the Peruvian Protected Area Agency purview.
Scoring:
No explanation given of unique significance to IPLCs;
Significance of site(s) vaguely described;
Unique significance of project site(s) clearly explained
Evidence A: El proyecto explica claramente el significado cultural del área de los Pueblos IndÃgenas y Comunidades Locales, la importancia de cada uno de los ecosistemas para la vida y para la práctica de la espiritualidad indÃgena y del conocimiento ancestral indigena.
Evidence B:Because the area is so broad, the statements on cultural significance are broad as well.
Scoring:
No evident threats;
Low threats;
Moderate threats;
Medium-high threats;
High threats;
Requires urgent action
Evidence A: Hay una larga lista de riesgos en la zona con las actividades extractivas, desmedida tala de arboles, caza y pesca ilegal, etc., actividades que ponen en riesgo la existencia de los PICL y la conservación holÃstica de los diversos ecosistemas y nichos ecológicos, de las áreas protegidas y sitios sagrados . Debido a la pandemia los riesgos son la escasez de agua y alimentos y la no práctica y goce de los derechos colectivos de los PI. Se pone en alto riesgo la vida de los niños, mujeres y ancianos
Evidence B:Some areas suffer more stress, especially those in frontier regions. There are many in remote areas that face fewer threats.
Scoring:
Legal and policy frameworks in project areas undermine IPLC governance (either actively or through absence);
Legal and policy frameworks recognize limited rights for IPLCs over their lands and/or resources;
Legal and policy frameworks recognize rights over lands and resources but with constraints (e.g., lack implementing regulations);
Legal and policy frameworks actively promote the recognition of IPLC governance
Evidence A: Como PICL conocen los derechos colectivos a nivel nacional e internacional, sin embargo en la implementación de proyectos se necesita contar con el aval y reconocimiento de los IP como titulares y poseedores de derechos, como seres capaces y responsables de decidir su futuro dentro del marco de la libre determinación, consulta, consentimiento libre, previo e informado, derecho al reparto de beneficios justo y equitativo y el derecho al veto entre otros
Evidence B:There are many laws and regulations, but those need to be improved. Also, those that do exist need to be effectively implemented.
Scoring:
National or sub-national governments are actively opposed to IPLC-led conservation;
National or sub-national governments have recognized the importance of IPLC-led conservation;
National or sub-national governments have implemented some support for IPLC-led conservation;
National or sub-national governments are actively engaged in the promotion of IPLC rights and IPLC-led conservation
Evidence A: En Peru hay algunas leyes que apoyan la conservación de algunas áreas en la Amazonia y el gobierno ha mostrado algún interés de trabajar con PI. Mientras las leyes no cuenten con presupuesto y la debida normativa serán solamente leyes y polÃticas de papel. La confianza deberá ser creada y cultivada entre el gobierno y los PI
Evidence B:Evidence shows that some agencies in the Peruvian government do support IPLC-led conservation where other agencies see them as an obstacle for progress.
Scoring:
No IPLC-led conservation initiatives have been implemented;
Few IPLC-led conservation projects have been implemented in pilot stages only;
Some IPLC-led conservation projects have been implemented beyond pilot stages;
Relevant IPLC-led conservation projects have been well established for many years
Evidence A: En el documento se puede observar que algunos proyectos se implementaron más allá de la fase piloto con el apoyo de sus técnicos y equipos de la comunidad. La inclusion de las mujeres será necesaria en los programas y actividades a futuro
Evidence B:The project highlights relatively successful projects in the Northern Peruvian Amazon (Alto Mayo) and in Southeastern Peru (Amarakaeri). Those experiences may be scaled up.
Scoring:
Few to no complementary projects/investment;
Complementary projects/investments are small, or are tangentially related to project goals;
Complementary Projects/investments align strongly with project goals and investments are substantial
Evidence A: AIDESEP administra y ejecuta al mismo tiempo proyectos en diversas ramas y regiones que apoyarán y complementarán proyectos relevantes de los PI sobre conservación, biodiversidad y cambio climático, el empoderamiento de los PI y la seguridad de vida de los PI y de la existencia de la biodiversidad y sus ecosistemas
Evidence B:The project provides information about 7 projects that could be complementary for the one proposed here.
Scoring:
Weakly aligned;
Partially aligned;
Well aligned;
Exceptionally well aligned
Evidence A: La propuesta propone trabajar los problemas que afectan a los PI, a sus tierras, territorios, aguas y recursos de acuerdo con los objetivos y áreas de la Iniciativa de Conservación Incluyente como son la biodiversidad, cambio climatico, degradación de las tierras, etc. Además incluye la participación de las mujeres, que se espera sea plena y efectiva
Evidence B:The project is broad and therefore partially aligned.
Scoring:
The objectives and approach for this project lack clarity and cohesion, and/or do not appear to be realistic for the context;
Activities & results defined but logic (Theory of Change) is incomplete;
Activities and results are well-defined and cohesive but some aspects require clarification;
The project has clear objectives and a cohesive approach with relevant activities for the context and timeline
Evidence A: Los objetivos y logros en cuanto a actividades sobre cambio climatico, salvaguardias, educación de las comunidades , participación en reuniones internacionales . etc. están claramente definidos. Importante será hacer un seguimiento continuo para velar por la realización de las actividades propuestas a tiempo y con los actores sociales y recursos técnicos necesarios
Evidence B:There are 5 objectives in the project. Three of them are relatively explained while two are only mentioned. There is no clear theory of change nor focus to this project.
Scoring:
Objectives and activities do not clearly address identified threats and opportunities;
Contributions to addressing the threats and opportunities are low;
Contributions to addressing threats and enabling conditions are slightly over-ambitious;
The impact on threats and enabling conditions can be realistically accomplished and are sufficiently ambitious for the projects' context
Evidence A: La organización conoce los graves desafÃos que tiene su región en cuanto a la pérdida de la biodiversidad , a las consecuencias negativas del cambio climático, por lo cual propone objetivos claros para obtener los resultados esperados
Evidence B:There is not enough detail to assess this question. Main feedback is for the proponents to focus on one or two things in order to have a larger impact.
Scoring:
Activities/results not aligned with EoI range of investment;
Activities/results Partially aligned with EoI range of investment ;
Activities/results Well aligned with EoI range of investment ;
Activities/results Exceptionally well aligned with EoI range of investment
Evidence A: Como han desarrollado diferentes tipos de proyectos con diversos socios y comunidades, bajo una buena administración de los recursos económicos de ICI complementados con otras fuentes si se lograran las actividades propuestas
Evidence B:There are too many objectives and to do all of them properly it would be too expensive.
Scoring:
None;
Small;
Moderate;
Significant
Evidence A: En el documento detallan algunas iniciativas concretas a nivel nacional para la continuación de las actividades planificadas , asà como de fondos de donantes
Evidence B:Most of the sources of co-financing is in-kind.
Scoring:
Not provided;
Very Low (below 10,000 Ha);
Moderate (between 100,000 - 500,000 Ha);
High (between 500,000 - 1,000,000 Ha);
Very high above 1,000,000 Ha
Evidence A: Los beneficios serán sustanciales y reales en cuanto a la tierra. No hay datos sobre beneficios en cuanto a áreas marinas
Evidence B:If all the Peruvian Amazon region is protected and effectively managed, yes the impact would be transformational. However, there is not a clear path to that end.
Scoring:
No provided cultural or livelihood indicators for the project;
Indicators proposed but are not clearly aligned with project goals;
Indicators proposed and are moderately aligned with project goals;
Additional cultural and/or livelihood indicators clearly derive from project goals
Evidence A: Propone la estimación de areas protegidas y territorios bioculturales indÃgenas y áreas de conservación administradas por los PICL, asà como la restauración de tierras
Evidence B:There are statements in this direction that do not contain enough detail.
Scoring:
Vision for long-term sustainability not provided;
This project does not seem to have a clear long-term impact;
This project will create medium-term benefits for biodiversity and IPLC governance, which future funding will hopefully build upon;
This project will ensure long-term benefits to biodiversity and IPLC systems of governance
Evidence A: AIDESEP tiene experiencia en la ejecución de proyectos no tan prolongados, propone socios que la ayudaran a seguir con las actividades propuestas a mediano plazo
Evidence B:The project is too general.
Scoring:
Contributions not provided;
The project is weakly related to either national priorities;
The project appears to be tangentially related to national priorities;
The proposal reflects an understanding of the national policy priorities and clearly positions the project in relation to those priorities
Evidence A: La organización está consciente de la problemática ambiental y de justicia social que afecta a los PICL, por lo tanto sus proyectos apuntan a la atención y resolución de esos problemas a nivel local, nacional e internacional
Evidence B:There is an effort in the text to build on national priorities.
Scoring:
Gender mainstreaming approach is absent;
Gender mainstreaming approach is weak;
Gender mainstreaming approach is moderately thought through (if there are a few activities as 'add ons');
Significant and well-thought through approach to gender mainstreaming
Evidence A: Menciona el trabajo con mujeres indÃgenas en una actividad especÃfica y en la creación de un documento, habla de incluir a las mujeres en las diversas actividades, tienen que ser mas especÃficos en cuanto a su participación
Evidence B:It seems that there is a gender perspective well established in the proponent’s approach.
Scoring:
None demonstrated;
Low demonstrated potential;
Moderate demonstrated potential;
Medium-high demonstrated potential;
High demonstrated potential;
Exceptional demonstrated potential
Evidence A: La organización conoce cuales son los problemas actuales que afectan a los PICL y al medio ambiente, por lo tanto proponen actividades para superar esos problemas en beneficio de los PI y de la misma Madre Naturaleza
Evidence B:For those activities where there is moer detail, yes- there is a transformative potential.
Scoring:
IPLC appear to be beneficiaries only;
Combination/partnership of IPLC organizations and NGOs, and plans to build IPLC capacity over the project term are clear;
IPLC-led approach, NGOs in more limited, defined roles (such as fiduciary);
Fully IPLC composed and led approach
Evidence A: Es una organización indÃgena con socios de diversas regiones y comunidades indÃgenas. Participaran solo como AIDASEP en la ICI
Evidence B:AIDESEP is a national-level indigenous organization.
Scoring:
None demonstrated;
Limited demonstration of relevant on-ground leadership;
Demonstrated on-ground leadership relevant to the proposed work;
Exceptional and long-standing on-ground leadership relevant to the proposed work
Evidence A: Es una organización con cuarenta años de trabajo en beneficio de los PICL y del medio ambiente
Evidence B:Yes, according to the references presented for other projects.
Scoring:
No partners defined;
No IPLC partners identified;
IPLC organizations are listed as implementing partners but without clear scope (roles in project design or governance);
IPLC organizations are listed as implementing partners with clear roles (in project design or governance);
Strong IPLC partnerships that play a central role in design, governance, and implementation of the project;
Strong IPLC partnerships have a central role in design, governance and implementation of the project and linkages with national or regional IPO networks
Evidence A: Cuenta con socios locales, nacionales e internacionales, IndÃgenas y no-IndÃgenas que apoya y fortalece el trabajo de AIDESEP
Evidence B:AIDESEP does not specify what other base organizations would have a clear role in this project.
Scoring:
No skills demonstrated;
The skills and experiences outlined have little or no relation to the project activities;
There is some lack of clarity or some gaps in the capacities necessary to implement the project;
The activities clearly show how they plan to fill capacity gaps over the course of the project;
They seem to have adequate skills and capacity for the project but do not have experience with GEF projects;
The lead organization and project partners clearly communicate that they have all the skills and experience necessary to implement the project activities. Also, have past experience with GEF funded projects.
Evidence A: No han tenido la oportunidad de trabajar con proyectos GEF, sin embargo tienen una amplia experiencia ganada con otros proyectos realizados con donantes
Evidence B:There is no evidence in the text that there is high capacity in AIDESEP to carry out this complex and broad project.
Scoring:
Very limited (no criteria met);
Some capacity but would require support (1/3 criteria);
Moderate capacity (2/3 criteria met);
Very strong (all criteria met) with demonstrated past performance
Evidence A: Su presupuesto anual sobrepasa el millón de dólares y cuentan siempre con el apoyo de donantes de varios paÃses
Evidence B:AIDESEP recently faced very public challenges in working with Rainforest Foundation Norway. Independent and transparent management could be an issue.
Scoring:
Answered no;
Answered yes but with weak or lacking explanation to the extent;
Answered yes with clear explanation of the extent
Evidence A: Tiene conocimiento y comprensión del alcance de las salvaguardias en cuanto a la pervivencia de los PI y conocimiento tradicional
Evidence B:0